The Wretched of the Earth

In the Preface Jean-Paul Sartre, one of the best-known French intellectuals, ponders the significance of The Wretched of the Earth and identifies five reasons why the book constitutes a seminal work that must be read by all Europeans (especially the French).

The first reason is that Frantz Fanon analyzes European culture from a critical distance, akin to a physician diagnosing a dying patient, rather than from the position of an admirer, which has been the case for most colonial writing up to that point. This allows the author to make accurate but uncomfortable observations about Europe’s situation and future prospects.

The second reason is that Fanon is writing for readers in second- and third-world countries rather than readers in France. This point of view renders Europe redundant and takes away its pretense of supremacy. Sartre enjoins Western audiences to read the book as if eavesdropping in a conversation that does not involve them.

The third reason Sartre gives for reading The Wretched of the Earth is its global reach. Fanon is not writing only about Algeria but about all colonized societies worldwide. All subjugated countries must revolt and achieve freedom together, otherwise they will be easily reconquered by Western powers. Sartre sees in this idea of third-world unification echoes of the communist idea of internationalism, which he supports.

The fourth reason is the book’s exploration of the mechanism of subjugation. Exploiting people presupposes their mistreatment, which in turn necessitates their dehumanization. However, to make local workers more productive, colonizers do not complete the process of breaking down the native population. The colonized people are left half-broken, or “half-native” (15), and their children learn to react negatively and violently toward the oppressors.

Finally, Sartre credits as a testament to the French public’s hypocrisy, since most claim to be liberal and cultured but do nothing about the existence of French colonies in which native populations are treated inhumanely. The ghost of the atrocities perpetrated by the French in Algeria is now part of the French identity. As the Sartre phases it, “it is enough today for two French people to meet together for there to be a dead man between them” (25). Here he makes an impassioned apology for the need of violence on the part of the colonized. He reminds the French that colonialism itself is a violent regime and that what is happening in Algeria is simply what the locals have learned from their oppressors. Additionally, the fighting in Algeria has the potential to save not only the colonized people but also the mother country: After Algeria achieves independence, France will no longer be in charge of it or all that entails. Consequently, Sartre wholly supports violence as a legitimate expression of agency on the part of a colonized society.